Wasps downward spiral... (6 Viewers)

[oldfiver]

Of course they will, too many people in positions of power who would have awkward questions asked of them if Wasps went tits up.

One in particular it seems - the avid ( or is it aphid ) WASPS supporter and Council CEO

 

---

[Gynnsthetonic]

Of course they will, too many people in positions of power who would have awkward questions asked of them if Wasps went tits up.

Hopefully the other people in positions of power see sense and don't lend them the money, Reeves should resign

 

[Nick]

Hopefully the other people in positions of power see sense and don't lend them the money, Reeves should resign

Maybe they will just go to the Ethics Committee where the usual happens

"Yes, he did break the rules but we think the rules are wrong so we will change them now"

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

One in particular it seems - the avid ( or is it aphid ) WASPS supporter and Council CEO

They’ll get whatever they need

 

[AOM]

Maybe they will just go to the Ethics Committee where the usual happens

"Yes, he did break the rules but we think the rules are wrong so we will change them now"

They will probably be "ambushed with Wasps shirts"

 

[Grendel]

Then?

The club would halve I assume gone through an administration process

 

[oldfiver]

The club would halve I assume gone through an administration process

However "unfair" there are procedures whereby a Majority Shareholder can effectively force the sale of the Minority Shareholding
It can be a tiresome and costly process

The key is a well worded Share Holder Agreement that allows for such a circumstance

 

[Liquid Gold]

Of course they will, too many people in positions of power who would have awkward questions asked of them if Wasps went tits up.

Those people should prepare to answer the awkward questions now because if they give Wasps £13m they will still go pop and the questions will only get more awkward.

Maybe they are all trying to kick the can down the road until they retire.

 

[Grendel]

However "unfair" there are procedures whereby a Majority Shareholder can effectively force the sale of the Minority Shareholding
It can be a tiresome and costly process

The key is a well worded Share Holder Agreement that allows for such a circumstance

It is 90% though isn’t it and Sisu hadn’t crossed that line without the transfer hence why Elliot was wondering around like a tuppaware salesman getting them off people

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Those people should prepare to answer the awkward questions now because if they give Wasps £13m they will still go pop and the questions will only get more awkward.

Maybe they are all trying to kick the can down the road until they retire.

Or moves on

 

[oldfiver]

It is 90% though isn’t it and Sisu hadn’t crossed that line without the transfer hence why Elliot was wondering around like a tuppaware salesman getting them off people

That is ( I think ) a compulsory squeeze out. So long as the Majority Holder has 75% there are ways to go forward
This tends to end up as a legal process and the aggrieved Minority Shareholders, at best end up agreeing a fair value for their shares Which is after discounting for their minority status

Mean while the Majority Holder carries on - the Minorities are effectively an Administive inconvenience

 

[LastGarrison]

Now I don’t know how all the funding works but surely with headlines and sound bites such as this:

Coventry council faces £17 million funding gap as inflation hits finances

Cllr Richard Brown says he's committed to not cutting services but it's "getting harder and harder"

www.coventrytelegraph.net

The WMCA then couldn’t justify giving a private company £35m could they?

 

[HuckerbyDublinWhelan]

Now I don’t know how all the funding works but surely with headlines and sound bites such as this:

Coventry council faces £17 million funding gap as inflation hits finances

Cllr Richard Brown says he's committed to not cutting services but it's "getting harder and harder"

www.coventrytelegraph.net

The WMCA then couldn’t justify giving a private company £35m could they?

You make it sound as if they care about public services

 

[clint van damme]

Now I don’t know how all the funding works but surely with headlines and sound bites such as this:

Coventry council faces £17 million funding gap as inflation hits finances

Cllr Richard Brown says he's committed to not cutting services but it's "getting harder and harder"

www.coventrytelegraph.net

The WMCA then couldn’t justify giving a private company £35m could they?

And CCC definitely can't justify giving them 13

 

[wingy]

And CCC definitely can't justify giving them 13

Can't help but notice that figure is a mere Million shy of the council mortgage they paid off.

 

[oldfiver]

CCC say to WMCA we need £14m to rectify our budget deficit but could you make it £27m as we have another £13m to find?

Culture, heritage and sport – LGA on Levelling Up White Paper ??

 

[fernandopartridge]

CCC at least could try and pretend covid is the reason Wasps are in such trouble and not that it was just a terrible idea for day 1!

 

[oldfiver]

CCC at least could try and pretend covid is the reason Wasps are in such trouble and not that it was just a terrible idea for day 1!

Would be a tricky task as they were losing money and short of cash before then

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Have WMCA bid £35 million for Gyo, Hamer and O’Hare?

 

[Flying Fokker]

In no way am I sticking up for SISU but they didn't take the fan's money and then stay quiet when the time to repay came. Anyway, it's not about SISU here it's about the eventual death of those stripey bstards. Hopefully.

yep, hopefully, then it’s up to SISU to come good. The only show in town?

 

[duffer]

Yeah, but all it does is kick the can down the road. HSBC will loan them money at a stupid interest rate, and given they’re losing 10m a year that will catch up.

And HSBC, not being run by complete fuckwits (unlike our council) will likely end up owning the stadium because that's all that Wasps can offer as security.

There's no way on earth a bank like HSBC goes into this without full security. I fancy they'll employ their own valuers too!

In fact, I'd take a punt on the bondholders at best offered a substantial haircut rather than a full repayment, and then a messy negotiation process started as to how much.

 

[clint van damme]

To paraphrase Mr. Benn, (one for the older posters), 'and as if by magic, the CET appeared:

Coventry Building Society Arena transformation ahead of summer events

The arena, home to Wasps and Coventry City, has been dressed up in recent days

www.coventrytelegraph.net

 

[HuckerbyDublinWhelan]

And HSBC, not being run by complete fuckwits (unlike our council) will likely end up owning the stadium because that's all that Wasps can offer as security.

There's no way on earth a bank like HSBC goes into this without full security. I fancy they'll employ their own valuers too!

In fact, I'd take a punt on the bondholders at best offered a substantial haircut rather than a full repayment, and then a messy negotiation process started as to how much.

Not sure they can - if it goes tits up the lease reverts to the council. They can’t own the actual stadium becuase that’s still owned by the council

 

[jordan210]

To paraphrase Mr. Benn, (one for the older posters), 'and as if by magic, the CET appeared:

Coventry Building Society Arena transformation ahead of summer events

The arena, home to Wasps and Coventry City, has been dressed up in recent days

www.coventrytelegraph.net

So they have put some bedsheets over the club badges and some stickers on the outside and we are suppose to be amazed.

What ever happened to this. Or have wasps wasted more public money and not complete the work

Multimillion-pound plan for Ricoh Arena revamp

The stadium is home to Wasps rugby team and will see football club Coventry City return soon.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Nick]

If a bog standard residential mortgage usually requires valuers to go out and look at the building before giving you a mortgage, it's safe to say that HSBC would be looking at the stadium first.

 

[duffer]

Not sure they can - if it goes tits up the lease reverts to the council. They can’t own the actual stadium becuase that’s still owned by the council

I don't think it quite works that way, but I'm wrong to talk about owning the stadium, I meant the 250-year lease.

In essence that's the same way as the bond is secured now - in theory if the bond isn't repaid I think the lease is sold to repay it. Wasps/ACL would no longer own it.

That's the same security HSBC would demand, I'd imagine.

If ACL goes into administration though, then I think the council can reclaim the lease. At this point I think it gets even messier because that would obviously be subject to challenge by whoever is holding it as security.

 

[HuckerbyDublinWhelan]

I don't think it quite works that way, but I'm wrong to talk about owning the stadium, I meant the 250-year lease.

In essence that's the same way as the bond is secured now - in theory if the bond isn't repaid I think the lease is sold to repay it. Wasps/ACL would no longer own it.

That's the same security HSBC would demand, I'd imagine.

If ACL goes into administration though, then I think the council can reclaim the lease. At this point I think it gets even messier because that would obviously be subject to challenge by whoever is holding it as security.

That’s why I’m not sure the lease can be used as security? It’s a bit of bizarre situation really. I may be wrong of course. How much is the training ground worth?

 

[HuckerbyDublinWhelan]

And then won’t the value drop when we theoretically leave in 8 years time. In the event that Wasps go tits up HSBC are then claiming a lease that is worthless in that who would
Buy a stadium with no tenant

 

[duffer]

And then won’t the value drop when we theoretically leave in 8 years time. In the event that Wasps go tits up HSBC are then claiming a lease that is worthless in that who would
Buy a stadium with no tenant

Completely with you on this, I always thought the valuation was a bit of smoke and mirrors, though I appreciate others differ.

And there's definitely a clause in the lease that says it reverts to the council in the case of an insolvency event.

I suppose failing to repay the bond isn't technically an insolvency event until the bondholder's trustee demands repayment, at which point maybe ACL sells the lease rather than being forced into administration or liquidation.

It all feels a bit wobbly to me though, I could definitely see this ending up back in court, and entirely without SISU's help (for once!).

 

[Grendel]

And HSBC, not being run by complete fuckwits (unlike our council) will likely end up owning the stadium because that's all that Wasps can offer as security.

There's no way on earth a bank like HSBC goes into this without full security. I fancy they'll employ their own valuers too!

In fact, I'd take a punt on the bondholders at best offered a substantial haircut rather than a full repayment, and then a messy negotiation process started as to how much.

wasps dont own the stadium

 

[Grendel]

Completely with you on this, I always thought the valuation was a bit of smoke and mirrors, though I appreciate others differ.

And there's definitely a clause in the lease that says it reverts to the council in the case of an insolvency event.

I suppose failing to repay the bond isn't technically an insolvency event until the bondholder's trustee demands repayment, at which point maybe ACL sells the lease rather than being forced into administration or liquidation.

It all feels a bit wobbly to me though, I could definitely see this ending up back in court, and entirely without SISU's help (for once!).

Again this is twaddle there is no assurance the lease goes back to the council at all

 

[oldfiver]

Again this is twaddle there is no assurance the lease goes back to the council at all

Risks relating the head lease of the Arena granted to ACL2006 Under the terms of the head lease granted by Coventry City Council (“CCC”) to Arena Coventry (2006) Limited (“ACL2006”) in respect of the Arena (the “Head Lease”), CCC have reserved the right to forfeit the Head Lease if ACL2006 becomes insolvent. Insolvency in this scenario means a situation where ACL2006 becomes unable to pay its debts, has a receiver/administrator/provisional liquidator appointed over its assets, has assets seized in order to pay debts of ACL2006 or has a winding-up order made against it. The effect of forfeiture would be that the 250 year Head Lease would fall away and that ACL would then become the tenant of CCC at the Arena for the remaining 38 years of its existing lease. However, the right of CCC to claim forfeiture of the Head Lease is not an automatic right. If CCC made a claim for such forfeiture, this could be contested by ACL2006, any third party that held security over ACL2006 and any subtenants of ACL2006 by making application to a court in England. Further, if an administrator was to be appointed over the assets of ACL2006, then CCC would not be able to forfeit the Head Lease without the consent of the appointed administrator or with the leave of the courts. If forfeiture was to take place prior to maturity of the Bonds, then U.S. Bank Trustees Limited, the entity that will hold the security on behalf of Bondholders, may not be in a position to assign the Head Lease for value in the event CCC forfeited the lease as described in the preceding paragraph. This may have an impact on the Bondholders’ ability to receive full repayment of their investment in the Bonds on the occurrence of such an insolvency event.

 

[HuckerbyDublinWhelan]

Again this is twaddle there is no assurance the lease goes back to the council at all

Even if it goes to HSBC what would they do with a lease? On paper we’re leaving in 8 years. If wasps go bump, there’s nobody who’d take on the lease - it would be worthless

 

[Grendel]

Risks relating the head lease of the Arena granted to ACL2006 Under the terms of the head lease granted by Coventry City Council (“CCC”) to Arena Coventry (2006) Limited (“ACL2006”) in respect of the Arena (the “Head Lease”), CCC have reserved the right to forfeit the Head Lease if ACL2006 becomes insolvent. Insolvency in this scenario means a situation where ACL2006 becomes unable to pay its debts, has a receiver/administrator/provisional liquidator appointed over its assets, has assets seized in order to pay debts of ACL2006 or has a winding-up order made against it. The effect of forfeiture would be that the 250 year Head Lease would fall away and that ACL would then become the tenant of CCC at the Arena for the remaining 38 years of its existing lease. However, the right of CCC to claim forfeiture of the Head Lease is not an automatic right. If CCC made a claim for such forfeiture, this could be contested by ACL2006, any third party that held security over ACL2006 and any subtenants of ACL2006 by making application to a court in England. Further, if an administrator was to be appointed over the assets of ACL2006, then CCC would not be able to forfeit the Head Lease without the consent of the appointed administrator or with the leave of the courts. If forfeiture was to take place prior to maturity of the Bonds, then U.S. Bank Trustees Limited, the entity that will hold the security on behalf of Bondholders, may not be in a position to assign the Head Lease for value in the event CCC forfeited the lease as described in the preceding paragraph. This may have an impact on the Bondholders’ ability to receive full repayment of their investment in the Bonds on the occurrence of such an insolvency event.

what if a parent company of ACL 2006 isn’t insolvent or the asset distribution transfers between the group means ACL 2006 isn’t insolvent?

This is a SBSL and Otium entertainment scenario isn’t it?

 

[SBAndy]

Is there a charge registered over the lease formally? That would prevent transfer of asset within the group without the consent of the bondholders/lender.